Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Hill

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 26, 2005PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

BOWES, J.:

¶ 1 The Commonwealth appeals from the January 27, 2004 order granting the pretrial suppression motion filed by Kenneth James Hill. We affirm.

¶ 2 The following principles are pertinent to our review:

[W]here a motion to suppress has been filed, the burden is on the Commonwealth to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the challenged evidence is admissible. Pa.R.Crim. P. 323(h). See Commonwealth v. Iannaccio, 505 Pa. 414, 480 A.2d 966 (1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 830, 106 S.Ct. 96, 88 L.Ed.2d 78 (1985). In reviewing the ruling of a suppression court, our task is…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Hickson Corp. v. Northern Crossarm Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
  3. In the Interest of D.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Commonwealth v. EllisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Commonwealth v. HamlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Jones v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  2. Commonwealth v. SandsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Commonwealth v. CauleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  4. Commonwealth v. FullerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API